'A Renewed Commitment'

As state governors and chief executive officers of companies from
across the United States gather in New York for this week's education
summit, their focus is on what states can do to improve student
performance. The summit points to a renewed commitment to education
from key public officials and business leaders. Because states have
constitutional authority over education, expectations are high for
state-by-state plans to carry through summit agreements on academic
standards and the use of technologies.

While the summit will focus on state responsibilities and actions,
the participants would do well to think about how the federal
government can support state action for educational improvement.
Although federal expenditures for elementary and secondary education
are only an average of 6 percent of total education spending, these
programs are intended to go hand in hand with states' efforts.
Therefore, the summit attendees should know how federal resources and
laws can bolster states' efforts. And, they should note that state and
federal cooperation is why the American people have supported a federal
role in education from the 1780s to this day.

On the topic of academic standards, one main focus of the summit,
the federal government has had a significant role that dates back three
decades. States and districts have taken part in federally funded
projects in research and development of assessments, standards,
curriculum frameworks, and teaching and learning practices.

Currently, schools have access to more than $350 million for
education improvement, the establishment of standards and assessments,
and professional development through the Goals 2000: Educate America
Act. States and localities have received funds under Title I of the
Improving America's Schools Act to develop standards and assessments
that ensure that poor children are challenged with the same high
academic requirements as all children. Funds under Title VI of the same
act assist in establishing standards. Over the past 30 years, the
National Science Foundation, the National Endowments for the Humanities
and the Arts, and the Departments of Labor and Education have pooled
resources to develop model voluntary standards in the sciences and
other subjects and assessments.

A second focus of the summit will be technology in education. Most
folks do not think about federal telecommunications policy as important
for education. But, it has never been more significant than today, as
we try to wire every school to networks of information. As any teacher
or principal knows, access to technology varies greatly among schools
and populations.

Public policies and practices for distribution of technological
access will have a profound effect either on closing or widening the
gap in our society between students and adults who "have" the skills of
the 21st-century workplace and those who "have not."

Since the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the
potential for advancing telecommunications' use in schools is
tremendous. For the first time, elementary and secondary schools are
included in "universal service." Actions at both the state and national
levels will have a profound impact on attempts to expand technology in
the schools. Although telecommunications policy is established
nationally, state leadership is essential to give the laws the greatest
impact in schools.

These are but two examples of what state leaders must be aware of as
they establish their educational strategies for the next decade. But
this gathering of state leaders would do well to keep in mind other
ways in which the federal government can advance their agenda for an
improved education system in every state.

Federal leaders play a visible role as advocates for the importance
of education and the need for improving the quality of student
achievement. The "bully pulpit" role should not be underestimated. What
happens at the federal level matters. People listen to what their
legislators say, even if they don't always agree with them. Presidents,
legislators, and Cabinet members have a political responsibility to
urge every school to achieve the dual goals of equity and
excellence.

The federal government also has the responsibility of targeting
funding to students who are economically disadvantaged, who have
disabilities, who are immigrants, or who have limited proficiency in
English.

Substantial federal legislation is on the books today to help these
students. One major problem is that these acts have never been fully
funded. The target populations are neither completely reached nor fully
served.

Federal initiatives, though, have historically had important,
long-term impacts. Since it was enacted in the 1960s, Title I has been
one of the most significant efforts to improve the performance of
economically disadvantaged children. Because of Title I funding, high
school graduation rates have increased substantially, and the gap
between minority and white students' academic achievement has been cut
in half.

Economic productivity, wages, and the demand for skilled workers
have received considerable attention in this presidential campaign
year. Federal funding for preparing our workforce is strongly supported
by both political parties. The government now plays a strong role in
fostering connections between education and business, and its programs
should encourage integrating academic and occupational education.

One of our nation's most astute economic and social analysts, Peter
Drucker, in the November 1994 Atlantic Monthly, calls the 21st century
the century of the knowledge society. Drucker writes: "Education will
become the center of the knowledge society, and the school is the key
institution." Knowledge, its distribution, and the capacity of our
citizens to use it, is our major asset. For individuals, for companies,
for armies, for domestic government--the key is knowledge.

Continuing to develop and use knowledge is central to assuring civic
responsibility in our democratic republic. Our economic productivity
and quality of life, our security and capacity for world peace, all
rely on a knowledgeable citizenry. Education is a national issue and,
therefore, it merits federal attention.

These roles as advocate and economic booster are bolstered by the
federal government's long-term role in collecting national education
statistics, researching "what works" in education, and reporting
schools' progress to the nation. At the postsecondary level, the
federal government supports the capacity for colleges and universities
to expand knowledge and improve practices through research in health,
social, economic, environmental, and security issues.

The federal role in elementary and secondary education in the past
has been targeted to improvement in a particular subject area, such as
vocational education, or to a particular population group, such as
migrant children. The challenge to the federal government in the '90s
and beyond is to raise the performance of all students to higher
standards, rather than just holding pockets of students to existing
standards. Federal initiatives can help ensure that all states and
districts are on the right track. Federal programs must provide for
long-term, systemic, schoolwide change in every state. They must
encourage higher-order thinking and creativity, analysis, questioning,
and judgment.

We are not there yet; federal, state, and local efforts are not yet
strong enough to prepare youngsters for the age of the knowledge
society. But federal interventions have helped. The recent federal
emphasis on raising standards in all schools is right on target.

The federal government, finally, has a key role in keeping education
as a top domestic priority while reminding us of its international
importance.

One of the most significant influences on the drive for improving
quality and student achievement in American education in the past 20
years has been the close analysis of international competition in
economics, military status, and education. We are comparing ourselves
to other nations on student performance and classroom practices in
other countries.

We also need to compare the commitments that governments in
industrialized and developing worlds are making in educational policy
and governance. They know that if they can gain an edge in education,
they will gain not only in productivity but also in their capacities to
strengthen the economy and quality of life for their people.

The author is the executive director of the Washington-based
Council of Chief State School Officers.

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.